1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the court of first instance, except for the addition of Paragraph 2 to the judgment on the argument emphasized by the defendant in this court. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article

(However, the part on co-defendant B, which was separated and confirmed in the first instance trial, is excluded. Of the reasons for the first instance judgment, “Defendant C” shall be deemed to be “Defendant”, and “Defendant B” shall be deemed to be “Co-Defendant B of the first instance trial.”

The fourth 10 expert witnesses of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be referred to as "expert of the court of first instance", and the term "this court" shall be referred to as "court of first instance".

The 7th day of the first instance judgment and the 11th day of the 11st day shall be added to “non-” next.

The text of the judgment of the first instance is 9 to 12. “If one side of the married couple bears a debt subject to division of property, and there is no amount remaining if the said debt is deducted from the total property value, the other party’s claim for division of property shall not be accepted.”

The 12th 15th 15th son of the judgment of the first instance shall be subject to the “standards”.

2. Additional determination

A. Summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) At the time of the instant donation contract, the Codefendant B of the first instance trial (hereinafter “B”).

) The Plaintiff held 50% (50,00 shares) of the R in real value of property and 46.125% (230,00 shares) of the S [B]’s shares held in that name were 19.38% (100,00 shares) of the S, but R holding 50% shares was 53.49% of the S’s shares (276,00 shares). Accordingly, the S shares held by B were 46.125% (230,00 shares)), and did not have any excess of the obligation (hereinafter “1’s claim”).

(2) Each of the instant real property is the property that the Defendant trusted in trust to B.

Therefore, the instant gift contract is substantially the same as that B returned each of the instant real estate to the Defendant following the termination of title trust.